International Journal of Economics and Business Administration

Volume VII, Issue 1, 2019

pp. 35-48

The Relevance of Shopper Marketing Touchpoints: An

Empirical Study on Wine Choice in Restaurants

Submitted 3/12/18, 1st revision 13/1/19, 2nd revision 1/2/19, accepted 13/2/19

Paulo Duarte Silveira1*

Abstract:

Shopper marketing is a relatively new approach that calls for an examination of potential

influences that can be triggered in several touchpoints along the entire path-to-purchase

customers’ journey.

The present study is carried out on that context, aiming to understand if the attributes

considered by wine customers in restaurants are influenced by a touchpoint. For that

purpose, an empirical quantitative study was conducted, with face-to-face interviews in

restaurants to a target population of 663 wine customers.

Results show that most attributes with highest importance-levels (“wine color”; “wine

region”; “certified wine region”) were positively influenced by only one touchpoint related

to previous consumption experience.

The attribute “brand” was influenced by several touchpoints, evidencing that managers

should not aim to simplify the shopper marketing management by acting only on few

touchpoints.

Keywords: Shopper marketing; Path to purchase; Wine marketing, Restaurants

JEL Classification: M31, L81, M37.

Acknowledgements: Author is grateful and acknowledge the cooperation of the students on

interviews, as well as the shoppers interviewed and the restaurant owners.

Paper published with the funding support of Polytechnic Institute of Setúbal.

1College of Business Administration-Polytechnic Institute of Setúbal, Setúbal, Portugal, and

CEFAGE-UE, Évora, Portugal. Corresponding author email: paulo.silveira@esce.ips.pt

CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk

Provided by OAR@UM

The Relevance of Shopper Marketing Touchpoints: An Empirical Study on Wine Choice in

Restaurants

36

1. Introduction

Over the past twenty years there have been significant macro-changes (knowledge

changes, lifestyle changes, technological changes and economical changes) that

altered shopping patterns and buying decisions, presenting new challenges for

retailers and manufacturers (Lee et al., 2017). The shopper marketing approach is a

relatively new approach, but already proven and effective that is has been attracting

retailers and suppliers attention and resources (Bogetić & Stojković, 2015), fitting in

those new challenges for retailers and manufacturers (Pinto et al., 2017), rooted in

marketing theory as a manifestation of the place policy in the traditional marketing

mix (Pinto et al., 2017).

Previous research on shopper marketing has been clearly focused on supermarkets,

but the shopper marketing principles can also be useful to other types of retailers and

producers (Gavilan et al., 2014; Ailawadi et al., 2009), such as the players in the

wine industry (Pomarici et al., 2012). The present study aims to contribute to this

research stream, by examining the influence of in-store and out-of-store shopper

touchpoints on wine choice decision-making in restaurants. The research option to

conduct an empirical study on restaurants (included in the Ho.Re.Ca system) is

because wine sales in Ho.Re.Ca have been decreasing in most countries and,

therefore, wine producers need to rethink the actions that can be undertaken to

improve the sales and quality of wine supply in HoRe.Ca system (Hildebrandt, 2012;

Pomarici et al., 2012). Moreover, retail wine purchasing is an important subject in

wine academic research (Barber, 2012; Mueller et al., 2010a; Mueller et al., 2010b;

Ritchie et al., 2010; Lockshin & Knott, 2009; Casini et al., 2009; Quinton and

Harridge-March, 2008; Hollebeek et al., 2007, Lockshin et al., 2006; Orth &

Bourrain, 2005), since the purchasing behaviour is affected by a range of different

factors, which lead to differences in the way customers approach wines (Lockshin &

Corsi, 2012). Previous research on wine purchasing has been focused on wine stores

(Stening & Lockshin, 2001; Lockshin & Kahrimanis, 1998) and supermarkets

(Handley & Lockshin, 1997), but restaurants are also an important outlet, yet less

studied (Jaeger et al., 2010; 2009; Cohen et al., 2009; Preszler & Schmit, 2009).

2. Conceptual Background

2.1 Shopper marketing approach and shopper touchpoints

Shopper marketing is "the planning and execution of all marketing activities that

influence a shopper along, and beyond, the entire path-to-purchase, from the point at

which the motivation to shop first emerges through purchase, consumption,

repurchase, and recommendation” (Shankar et al., 2011, p. 29). Shopper marketing

is not opposed to traditional marketing, on the contrary, is compatible with

traditional marketing tools (Ziliani & Ieva, 2015), but it implies a more holistic

approach along the several touchpoints on the entire path to purchase.

Paulo Duarte Silveira

37

From the shopper marketing definition is noticeable that this kind of marketing

approach implies recognizing that there are several other “moments of truth” besides

the end consumption (Lamey et al., 2018). As Jones and Runyan (2016) state, when

an individual is in shopping mode, such shopper purchase decision is often markedly

different from decisions made whilst engaged in other stages of the traditional

consumption process. So, the management of the several possible customer

touchpoints must include the planning and shopping general moments, besides the

mere end consumption.

There are several ways to categorize customer experience touchpoints along the path

to purchase. For example, Lemon and Verhoef (2016) identify four types of

touchpoints: brand-owned, partner-owned, customer-owned, and

social/external/independent. All of them might be present in the prepurchase stage,

purchase stage or postpurchase stage. Regardless of the discussion on designations

and typologies, a representation of common general touchpoints along the path-to-

purchase is shown on Figure 1.

Figure 1. Path-to-purchase process and touchpoints

Source: Adapted from Retail Commission on Shopper Marketing (2010).

Discussing the theme of customer experience, Lemon and Verhoef (2016) mention

that customers now interact with firms through a myriad touch points in multiple

channels and media, making the understanding of customer experience and customer

journey even more critical. Those authors mention as well that there is a solid

foundation in academic and business literature that customer experience is created

through the purchase journey, emphasize the importance of managing the different

touch points in the customer journey. Turning this panorama even more complex,

managers should keep in mind that the mind of the shopper is not neat, neither

orderly nor totally conscious and logical (Soars, 2003). This means that the

The Relevance of Shopper Marketing Touchpoints: An Empirical Study on Wine Choice in

Restaurants

38

management of the customer touchpoints aims to provide a pathway to the purchase

that can be triggered with in-store conscious and unconscious touchpoints actions.

Furthermore, shopper marketing emphasizes that (Lamey et al., 2018, p. 433)

“product success varies in function of the retail-shopper environment and allows for

the distinct possibility that the effectiveness of marketing efforts can – and will –

vary based on the shopper retail context”.

2.2 Wine marketing touchpoints

Following the already mentioned rationale of the path-to-purchase customer journey,

the understanding of what drives wine choice is critical to successful wine marketing

(McCutcheon et al., 2009). In fact, the analysis and understanding of consumers and

shoppers in the wine industry is particularly important for marketing planning

(Mora, 2016), due to the wine market specificities, namely the fragmented industry

and myriad of brands (Vrontis et al., 2011).

Several of the studies found about retail wine purchasing have measured the

intended purchasing as being influenced by personal characteristics or purchasing

contexts (Lockshin & Corsi, 2012). Another research stream addressed the influence

of atmospherics in wine stores (North et al., 1999; Areni & Kim, 1994; 1993).

However, besides personal characteristics and store atmospherics, risk reducing

strategies are particularly important in wine purchasing (Atkin & Thach, 2012; Atkin

et al., 2007; Mitchell & Greatorex, 1989 and 1988). In fact, information search (i.e.,

learning about wine prior to buying choice, according to Olsen and Thach (2001))

might be expected to play an important role, because is a possible way of wine

consumers to reduce the purchasing risk (Mitchell & Greatorex, 1989). The

importance of information search as a risk reducing strategy is explained by the

several products, brands and alternatives available, as well as by the difficulty to

assess knowledge of the product's attributes by visual inspection of the product

(Chaney, 2000). In fact, wine is commonly perceived by consumers as a complicated

product (Johnson & Bruwer, 2007) and, when ordering wine in a restaurant,

consumers perceive a high degree of risk or uncertainty (Bruwer et al., 2017; Lacey

et al., 2009).

In a shopper marketing context, the customer touchpoints might act as important

information sources, either acting consciously or subconsciously. These type of

information sources can consist on experience, subjective knowledge, and objective

knowledge on sources of information (Dodd et al., 2005). Specifically on wine

purchasing information sources, several previous studies were found identifying the

possible information sources, namely on the following sources: price (Gil &

Sánchez, 1997; Lockshin et al., 1993); cues on the wine package and label (Mueller

et al., 2010; Verlegh & Steenkamp, 1999); awards (Orth & Krška, 2001);

place/region and/or country of origin (Bruwer & Buller, 2013; Johnson & Bruwer,

2007; Orth et al., 2005; Felzensztein et al., 2004; Duhan et al., 1999; Gil & Sánchez,

1997); online sources (Edwards, 1989); expert opinion by reading wine reviews and

Paulo Duarte Silveira

39

books (Chaney, 2000); grape vintage year (Mtimet & Albisu, 2006; Ling &

Lockshin, 2003; Gil & Sánchez, 1997); wine lists (Corsi et al., 2012); promotion and

positioning of products inside the point of sale (Brodie & Hollebeek, 2009); advice

from salespersons/waiters and other persons (e.g. Parsons & Thompson, 2009);

samples and in-house display (Hall et al., 2004).

2.3 Research objectives

Connecting the conceptual relevance of customer touchpoints along the path to

purchase and the specificities of wine purchasing, it is expected that customer

touchpoints might have a positive influence on the attributes considered by shoppers

on the purchasing moment.

Thereby, the present study aims to understand if that positive relation is verified in

the context of on-trade wine customers – the simultaneous purchase and

consumption in restaurants – in order to understand if the shopper marketing actions

should be managed focusing efforts in a certain type of touchpoint or in several

touchpoints. So, in this study, the hypothesis established is that a positive correlation

exists between each wine choice attribute and each customer touchpoint.

3. Research Methods

3.1 Procedures

A quantitative empirical study was conducted with primary data collected among

restaurant visitors. Recruiting and face-to-face interviewing were the data gathering

techniques used, since face-to-face in interviews still deliver the most representative

results in wine consumer research (Szolnokin & Hoffmann, 2013). This research

option is sustained by the fact that individuals can be asked directly about their

purchasing behaviour (Lockshin et al., 2001; Bruwer et al., 2002).

Besides demographics, wine consuming frequency and wine knowledge level the

variables measured with the questionnaire were grouped on (i) attributes on the wine

choice (dependent variables) and (ii) consumer touchpoints along the path to

purchase (independent variables). The items analysed on the attributes considered on

wine choice were adapted from Cohen et al. (2009) and Hall et al. (2001), using a

five-point importance-level options. The items considered on the costumer

touchpoints group were adapted from Lacey et al. (2009), including instore and out

of store touchpoints, and were measured with a five-point Likert response options.

The items measured in each group were:

− Attributes on the wine choice: Wine colour, Type of grape, Wine region

certification, Wine region, Price promotion, Price being low, Price being

medium, Price being high, Wine formats available, Brand, Alcoholic grade,

Wine age/year, Combination with the meal, wanted to try something

different.

The Relevance of Shopper Marketing Touchpoints: An Empirical Study on Wine Choice in

Restaurants

40

− Costumer touchpoints along the path to purchase: Waiter recommendation,

Previous positive experienced with the wine, Loyalty to the wine,

Recommendation on the cart/menu, Influence of other people on the table,

Suggestion of someone else not present, Previous information about the

wine but had not tasted it yet, Something seen inside the restaurant

awakened the interest, Previously seen ads, Read positive information on

the internet, newspapers or magazines.

3.2 Sample

Primary data were collected in 15 restaurants, interviewing a sample of wine

drinkers now of consumption in those restaurants. The sample consisted of 663

individuals, 51% of them male and 49% female.

Using Jonson and Bruwer (2007) options for the consumer self-reported wine

consuming frequency, the wine consuming rates of this sample were: 13% once a

day, 20% few times a week, 18% once a week, 16% once every two weeks, 15%

once a month, 8% once every two months, and 10% consumes less frequently. Also

using Jonson and Bruwer (2007) variables, the wine consumers’ self-reported level

knowledge about wines were: 12% said to be newt to wine, 34% know a little about

wine, 44% somewhat knowledgeable about wine, 9% Very knowledgeable about

wine 9%, and 1% expert or professional.

4. Findings

As a previous step to compute the correlations of wine choice attributes with wine

costumer touchpoints, the perceived importance of each wine attribute on the

purchase choice was computed, calculating the mean importance and standard

deviation for each wine attribute, presented in Table 1. The wine attributes

evidencing a mean importance higher than 3,5 (ie threshold higher than neutral)

were: wine colour, combination of the wine with the specific meal, terroir/region of

origin, brand, and the having a formally certified wine. Among these, the wine

colour and the combination of the wine with the food were clearly the most

important ones.

Another preliminary step made was the analysis of the costumer touchpoints’

general influence, calculating the mean and standard deviation for each touchpoint

(Table 2). Touchpoint “OT1 Already experienced the wine before and liked it” was

clearly the most relevant one.

Table 3 shows the correlations of wine choice attributes with each touchpoint (the

same Table 3 is simplified in appendix A showing only the positive significant

correlations found). Based on the results of Table 3, the hierarchy of statistically

significant positive correlations of wine attributes and touchpoints are shown in

Table 4.

Paulo Duarte Silveira

41

Table 1. Wine choice attributes importance Attributes mean st.dev.

A1 Wine color (red, white, etc) 4,21 0,84

A2 Type of grape 3,19 1,10

A3 The region is certified 3,61 1,04

A4 Wine region 3,86 0,99

A5 Price promotion 3,22 1,21

A6 Price is low 3,01 1,21

A7 Price is medium 2,91 1,05

A8 Price is high 2,78 1,18

A9 The wine is available in various formats 3,01 1,19

A10 Brand 3,82 1,00

A11 Alcoholic grade 3,11 1,19

A12 Wine age/year 3,38 1,20

A13 Combination with the meal/food 4,10 1,02

A14 Wanted to try something different 2,93 1,30

Table 2. Customer touchpoints’ relevance

Type Touchpoint mean st.dev.

Instore IT1 Waiter recommendation 3,10 1,29

Out of

store

OT1 Already experienced the wine before and liked it 3,81 1,14

Out of

store

OT2 The wine is one of the three wines the shopper is

more loyal to

3,00 1,37

Instore IT2 Recommendation of the restaurant menu/cart 2,98 1,36

Instore IT3 Suggestion of someone else on the table 2,67 1,31

Out of

store

OT3 Suggestion of someone else not present 2,19 1,06

Out of

store

OT4 Had information about the wine but had not tasted it

yet

2,84 1,3

Instore IT4 Saw something in the restaurant that awaken the

interest

2,70 1,20

Out of

store

OT5 Had already seen ads about the wine and was curious 2,69 1,28

Out of

store

OT6 Had read positive information about the wine on the

internet, newspapers or magazines

2,66 1,28

It is noticeable that OT1 (Already experienced the wine before and liked it) is the

most important customer touchpoint out of thirteen wine attributes with positive

correlations.

The Relevance of Shopper Marketing Touchpoints: An Empirical Study on Wine Choice in

Restaurants

42

Touchpoints IT1 (Waiter recommendation) and OT4 (Had information about the

wine but had not tasted it yet) are also important, since OT4 is significant in 8 wine

attributes, and IT1 is significant in 7 attributes. Just like OT1, touchpoints OT4 and

IT1 seem to be reliable information sources to reduce the risk decision of choosing

the appropriate wine.

Restricting the analysis only to the most important wine choice attributes (ie, the

wine choice attributes with mean importance higher than 3,5), the results in Table 4

show that “Wine colour”, “Wine region” and “Certified wine region” were

positively influenced by just one touchpoint – OT1, reinforcing the previously

mentioned deduction of OT1’s relevance.

However, the attribute “Brand” was influenced by more touchpoints besides OT1,

namely OT2 (The wine is one of the three wines the shopper is more loyal to) and

OT5 (Had already seen ads about the wine and was curious). This result highlights

the relevance of an integrated management of several touchpoints along the entire

path-to-purchase, instead of acting on only one. Furthermore, in Table 4 is

noticeable that every touchpoint has at least two positive correlations with wine

attributes - the minimum is two positive correlations in OT3, and the maximum is

eight positive correlations in IT2.

5. Conclusions

In the context of shopper marketing, our study aimed to understand if the attributes

considered by wine customers in restaurants are influenced by a touchpoint. This is

particularly important to understand if shopper marketing actions should focus

efforts in a certain type of touchpoint.

The results pointed to the high relevance of the touchpoint related to previous wine

consumption experience by the customer. This customer touchpoint was the one

with the highest mean importance and had six positive significant correlations with

wine choice attributes. As a managerial implication, is important that wine producers

must be capable to design and produce wines that satisfy the consumer, in order to

repeat consumption decisions. This seems to be particularly important in highly

fragmented markets, like the wine industry, characterized by a myriad of product of

brands available for customers to choose from.

Some wine choice attributes were influenced by more than one touchpoint. The

attribute “wine brand” is particularly relevant in this context, because it was one of

the most important attributes and was positively influenced by three touchpoints:

previous consumption experience; shopper loyalty to the product; and having

already seen ads about the wine and was curious. This fact of attributes being

influenced by several touchpoints suggests that managers should not aim to simplify

the shopper marketing management by acting only on few touchpoints. By the

contrary, brands should design shopping marketing activities along the entire path-

Paulo Duarte Silveira

43

to-purchase, covering all the touchpoints. So, wine companies could allocate more

resources and focus in certain touchpoints but should not neglect the other ones.

Table 3. Correlations of wine choice attributes attributes vs customer touchpoints

Attribute IT1 OT1 OT2 IT2 IT3 OT3 OT4 IT4 OT5

A1 -,118*** ,063* -,075** -,172*** -,180*** -,334*** -,116*** -,182*** -,094**

,002 ,057 ,043 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,002 ,000 ,010

A2 -,050 ,038 ,035 ,081** -,058 -,134*** ,110*** ,094** ,054

,123 ,190 ,227 ,045 ,130 ,005 ,005 ,015 ,107

A3 -,159*** ,099** -,025 -,029 -,261*** -,262*** ,034 -,026 ,036

,000 ,018 ,321 ,291 ,000 ,000 ,238 ,289 ,226

A4 -,156*** ,101** -,080** -,072 -,118*** -,232*** -,079** -,118*** -,104**

,001 ,017 ,049 ,066 ,007 ,000 ,048 ,007 ,016

A5 ,197*** ,045 ,009 ,171*** ,135*** ,056 ,107*** ,102*** ,041

,000 ,136 ,419 ,000 ,002 ,116 ,004 ,006 ,158

A6 ,139*** ,011 -,015 ,162*** ,108** ,014 ,006 ,051 -,083**

,001 ,404 ,369 ,000 ,011 ,384 ,445 ,124 ,029

A7 ,071* ,061* ,026 ,052 ,047 -,023 ,002 ,013 -,028

,051 ,081 ,280 ,117 ,161 ,310 ,481 ,387 ,260

A8 ,107*** ,007 ,043 ,117*** ,159*** ,049 ,136*** ,079** ,087**

,007 ,434 ,167 ,004 ,000 ,149 ,001 ,036 ,025

A9 ,139*** ,021 -,075** ,126*** -,044 -,054 ,071** ,111*** ,022

,000 ,300 ,044 ,002 ,178 ,127 ,040 ,003 ,292

A10 ,027 ,152*** ,141*** ,049 ,059 -,053 -,042 -,026 ,073**

,250 ,000 ,001 ,129 ,102 ,129 ,149 ,261 ,035

A11 ,145*** ,075** ,153*** ,122*** ,150*** ,075* ,166*** ,164*** ,120***

,000 ,031 ,000 ,002 ,001 ,054 ,000 ,000 ,001

A12 ,017 ,021 ,080** ,095** ,043 -,039 ,070** ,073** ,127***

,332 ,303 ,034 ,015 ,180 ,205 ,041 ,035 ,001

A13 -,230*** -,017 -,142*** -,157*** -,159*** -,245*** -,165*** -,263*** -,138***

,000 ,348 ,001 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,001

A14 ,429*** -,154*** -,022 ,400*** ,373*** ,335*** ,616*** ,497*** ,362***

,000 ,000 ,332 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000

Notes: Spearman correlation 1-tailed, * Significant at .10 level, ** Significant at .05 level,

*** Significant at .01 level.

This research has limitations that can point to further research directions. The

sample poses research limitations due to having studied the individuals’ opinions

and perceptions in a certain moment and specific place/restaurant. Therefore, is

recommended to enlarge the study to different samples, in order to examine the

possibility of results’ generalization. The number of wine choice attributes was not

The Relevance of Shopper Marketing Touchpoints: An Empirical Study on Wine Choice in

Restaurants

44

exhaustive, so that the questionnaire and interviews were not too long. The same

research option was made regarding the customer touchpoints presented. Both facts

could be minimized in future researches by using more detailed questionnaires.

Table 4. Hierarchy of positive significant correlations of choice attributes vs

touchpoints Attributes* Touchpoint

A1 Wine color OT1

A13 Combination with the meal/food None

A4 Wine region OT1

A10 Brand OT1> OT2 > OT5

A3 The region is certified OT1

A12 Wine age/year OT5> OT6> IT2 > OT2 > IT4 > OT4

A5 Price promotion IT1> IT2> IT3> OT4> IT4

A2 Type of grape OT4> IT4> IT2> OT6

A11 Alcoholic grade OT4> IT4 > IT2 >IT1 > IT2 > OT5 > OT6>

OT1> OT3 A9 The wine is available in various

formats IT1> IT2 > IT4 >OT4

A6 Price is low IT2> IT1> IT3

A14 Wanted to try something different OT4> IT4> IT1 > IT2 > IT3 > OT5 > OT6 > OT3

A7 Price is medium IT1> OT1

A8 Price is high IT3> OT4> IT2 > IT1 > OT5 > IT4

Note: *Wine choice attributes ordered by their mean importance, from highest to lowest.

In a global manner, we conclude that, for restaurants wine costumers, touchpoints

should be managed along the entire path-to-purchase, but efforts and resources

might be focused on a small number of more effective touchpoints. Albeit, the

effectiveness of marketing efforts will probably vary in other sectors or retail

contexts, opening research avenues to future studies.

References:

Ailawadi, K.L., Beauchamp, J.P., Donthu, N., Gauri, D.K. & Shankar, V. 2009.

Communication and promotion decisions in retailing: a review and directions for

future research. Journal of Retailing, 85(1), 42–55.

Areni, C.S. & Kim, D. 1993. The influence of background music on shopping behavior:

classical versus top-forty music in a wine store. Advances in consumer research,

20(1), 336-340.

Areni, C.S. & Kim, D. 1994. The influence of in-store lighting on consumers' examination of

merchandise in a wine store. International journal of research in marketing, 11(2),

117-125.

Atkin, T. Nowak, L. & Garcia, R. 2007. Women wine consumers: information search and

retailing implications. International Journal of Wine Business Research, 19(4), 327-

339.

Paulo Duarte Silveira

45

Atkin, T. & Thach, L. 2012. Millennial wine consumers: risk perception and information

search. Wine Economics and Policy, 1(1), 54-62.

Barber, N. 2012. Consumers' intention to purchase environmentally friendly wines: a

segmentation approach. International Journal of Hospitality and Tourism

Administration, 13, 26–47.

Bogetić, Z. & Stojković, D. 2015. Systematic Shopper Marketing for Sustainable

Competitive Advantage. Trade Perspectives, 134-150.

Brodie, R., Hollebeek, L.D. 2009. Wine service marketing, value co-creation and

involvement: research issues. International Journal of Wine Business Research, Vol.

21(4), 330-252.

Bruwer, J. & Buller, C. 2013. Product involvement, brand loyalty, and country-of-origin

brand preferences of Japanese wine consumers. Journal of wine research, 24(1), 38-

58.

Bruwer, J., Arias, A.P.P. & Cohen, J. 2017. Restaurants and the single-serve wine by-the-

glass conundrum: Risk perception and reduction effects. International Journal of

Hospitality Management, 62, 43-52.

Casini, L, Corsi, A., Goodman, S. 2009. Consumer preferences of wine in Italy applying

best–worst scaling. International Journal of Wine Business Research, 21, 64–78.

Chaney, I.M. 2000. External search effort for wine. International journal of wine marketing,

12(2), 5-21.

Cohen, E., d'Hauteville, F. & Sirieix, L. 2009. A cross-cultural comparison of choice criteria

for wine in restaurants. International Journal of Wine Business Research, 21(1), 50-

63.

Corsi, A.M. Mueller, S. & Lockshin, L. 2012. Let’s see what they have what consumers look

for in a restaurant wine list. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 53(2), 110-121.

Dodd, T.H., Laverie, D.A., Wilcox, J.F. & Duhan, D.F. 2005. Differential effects of

experience, subjective knowledge, and objective knowledge on sources of information

used in consumer wine purchasing. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 29(1),

3-19.

Duhan, D., Kiecker, P., Areni, C. & Guerrero, C. 1999. Origin information and retail sales of

wine. International Journal of Wine Marketing, 11 (3), 44–58.

Edwards, F. 1989. The marketing of wine from small wineries: Managing the intangibles.

International Journal of Wine Marketing, 1(1), 14-17.

Felzensztein, C., Hibbert, S. & Vong, G. 2004. Is the country of origin the fifth element in

the marketing mix of imported wine? A critical review of the literature. Journal of

Food Products Marketing, 10(4), 73-84.

Gavilan, D., Avello, M. & Abril, C. 2014. Shopper Marketing: A New Challenge for Spanish

Community Pharmacies. Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy, Vol. 10,

No. 6, e125–e136.

Gil, J.M. & Sánchez, M. 1997. Consumer preferences for wine attributes: a conjoint

approach. British Food Journal, 99(1), 3-11.

Hall, J., Lockshin, L. & Barry O'Mahony, G. 2001. Exploring the links between wine choice

and dining occasions: Factors of influence. International journal of wine marketing,

13(1), 36-53.

Hall, J. Binney, W. & O'Mahoney, G. 2004. Age related motivational segmentation of wine

consumption in a hospitality setting. International Journal of Wine Marketing, 16 (3),

29-43.

Handley, I. & Lockshin, L. 1997. Wine purchasing in Singapore: a supermarket observation

approach. International Journal of Wine Marketing, 9(2), 70-82.

The Relevance of Shopper Marketing Touchpoints: An Empirical Study on Wine Choice in

Restaurants

46

Hildebrandt, S. 2012. High hopes for on-premise. Beverage Industry, 10(4), 48-50.

Hollebeek, L., Jaeger, S., Brodie, R. & Balemi, A. 2007. The influence of involvement on

purchase intention for new world wine. Food Quality and Preference, 18, 1033–1049.

Jaeger, S.R., Danaher, P.J. & Brodie, R.J. 2010. Consumption decisions made in restaurants:

The case of wine selection. Food quality and preference, 21(4), 439-442.

Johnson, R. & Bruwer, J. 2007. Regional brand image and perceived wine quality: the

consumer perspective. International Journal of Wine Business Research, 19(4), 276-

297.

Jones, R.P. & C. Runyan, R. 2016. Conceptualizing a path-to-purchase framework and

exploring its role in shopper segmentation. International Journal of Retail &

Distribution Management, 44(8), 776-798.

Lacey, S., Bruwer, J. & Li, E. 2009. The role of perceived risk in wine purchase decisions in

restaurants. International Journal of Wine Business Research, 21(2), 99-117.

Lamey, L., Deleersnyder, B., Steenkamp, J.B.E. & Dekimpe, M.G. 2018. New product

success in the consumer-packaged goods industry: A shopper marketing approach.

International Journal of Research in Marketing, 35, 432-452.

Lee, L., Inman, J., Argo, J., Bottger, T., Dholakia, U., Gilbride, T., van Ittersum, K., Kahn,

B., Kalra, A., Lehmann, D., McAlister, L., Shankar, V. & Tsai, C.I. 2017. From

Browsing to Buying and Beyond: The Needs-Adaptive Shopper Journey Model.

Rotman School of Management Working Paper No. 3093999; University of Alberta

School of Business Research Paper No. 2017-2712.

Lemon, K.N. & Verhoef, P.C. 2016. Understanding customer experience throughout the

customer journey. Journal of Marketing, 80(6), 69-96.

Ling, B.H. & Lockshin, L. 2003. Components of wine prices for Australian wine: how

winery reputation, wine quality, region, vintage, and winery size contribute to the

price of varietal wines. Australasian Marketing Journal, 11(3), 19-32.

Lockshin, L. & Corsi, A. 2012. Consumer behaviour for wine 2.0: A review since 2003 and

future directions. Wine Economics and Policy 1, 2-23.

Lockshin, L. & Kahrimanis, P. 1998. Consumer evaluation of retail wine stores. Journal of

Wine Research, 9(3), 173-184.

Lockshin, L., Knott. D. 2009. Boozing or branding? Measuring the effects of free wine

tastings at wine shops. International Journal of Wine Business Research, 21, 312–324.

Lockshin, L. & Timothy Rhodus, W. 1993. The effect of price and oak flavor on perceived

wine quality. International Journal of Wine Marketing, 5(2/3), 13-25.

McCutcheon, E., Bruwer, J. & Li, E. 2009. Region of origin and its importance among

choice factors in the wine-buying decision making of consumers. International Journal

of Wine Business Research, 21(3), 212-234.

Mitchell, V.W. & Greatorex, M. 1988. Consumer risk perception in the UK wine market.

European Journal of Marketing, 22(9), 5-15.

Mitchell, V.W. & Greatorex, M. 1989. Risk reducing strategies used in the purchase of wine

in the UK. International Journal of Wine Marketing, 1(2), 31-46.

Mora, P. 2016. When the E-Shopper Meets the Wine Industry. In Wine Positioning (pp. 81-

91), Springer International Publishing.

Mtimet, N. & Albisu, L.M. 2006. Spanish wine consumer behavior: A choice experiment

approach. Agribusiness 22(3), 343-362.

Mueller, S., Lockshin, L., Saltman, Y., Blanford, J. 2010a. Message on a bottle: the relative

influence of wine back label information on wine choice. Food Quality and

Preference, 21, 22–32.

Paulo Duarte Silveira

47

Mueller, S., Osidacz, P., Francis, I., Lockshin, L. 2010b. Combining discrete choice and

informed sensory testing in a two-stage process can it predict wine market share?

Food Quality and Preference, 21, 741–754.

North, A.C., Hargreaves, D.J. & McKendrick, J. (1999). The influence of in-store music on

wine selections. Journal of Applied psychology, 84(2), 271.

Olsen, J., Thach, L. 2001. Consumer behavior regarding wine consumption: a conceptual

framework. Australian and New Zealand Wine Business Journal-Special Marketing

Addition, 16 (6), 123–129.

Orth, U.R., Bourrain, A. 2005. Ambient scent and consumer exploratory behaviour: a causal

analysis. Journal of Wine Research, 16, 137-150.

Orth, U.R. & Krška, P. 2001. Quality signals in wine marketing: the role of exhibition

awards. The International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, 4(4), 385-

397.

Orth, U.R., McGarry, W.M. & Dodd, T.H. 2005. Dimensions of wine region equity and their

impact on consumer preferences. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 14(2), 88-

97.

Parsons, A.G. & Thompson, A.M. 2009. Wine recommendations: who do I believe? British

food journal, 111(9), 1003-1015.

Pinto, G.L., Pinto, G.L., Dell’Era, C., Dell’Era, C., Verganti, R., Verganti, R. & Bellini, E.

2017. Innovation strategies in retail services: solutions, experiences and meanings.

European Journal of Innovation Management, 20(2), 190–209.

Pomarici, E., Boccia, F. & Catapano, D. 2012. The wine distribution systems over the world:

An explorative survey. New Medit, 11(4), 23-32.

Preszler, T. & Schmit, T.M. 2009. Factors affecting wine purchase decisions and presence of

New York wines in upscale New York City restaurants. Journal of food distribution

research, 40(3), 16-30.

Quinton, S. Harridge-March, S. 2008. Trust and online wine purchasing: insights into UK

consumer behavior. International Journal of Wine Business Research, 20, 68–85.

Retail Commission on Shopper Marketing 2010. Shopper Marketing Best Practices: A

Collaborative Model for Retailers and Manufacturers. In-Store Marketing Institute.

Ritchie, C. Elliott, G. Flynn, M. 2010. Buying wine on promotion is trading-up in UK

supermarkets: a case study in Wales and Northern Ireland. International Journal of

Wine Business Research, 22, 102–121.

Shankar, V., Inman, J., Mantrala, M., Kelley, E. & Rizley, R. 2011. Innovations in Shopper

Marketing: Current Insights and Future Research Issues. Journal of Retailing, 87S (1),

S29–S42.

Szolnokin, G. & Hoffmann, D. (2013). Online, face-to-face and telephone surveys -

Comparing different sampling methods in wine consumer research. Wine Economics

and Policy, 2, 57-66.

Stening, S. & Lockshin, L. 2001. A comparison of on-line and in-store customers in the wine

retail sector. Special Wine Marketing Supplement to the Australian and New Zealand

Wine Industry Journal, 16 (6), 138-144.

Verlegh, W. Steenkamp, J. 1999. A review and meta-analysis of country-of-origin research.

Journal of Economic Psychology, 20, 521–546.

Vrontis, D., Thrassou, A. & Czinkota, M.R. 2011. Wine marketing: A framework for

consumer-centred planning. The Journal of Brand Management, 18(4-5), 245-263.

Ziliani, C. & Ieva, M. 2015. Retail shopper marketing: The future of promotional flyers.

International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 43(6), 488-502.

The Relevance of Shopper Marketing Touchpoints: An Empirical Study on Wine Choice in

Restaurants

48

Appendix A. Positive correlations of attributes vs touchpoints

Touchpoint

Attribute IT1 OT1 OT2 IT2 IT3 OT3 OT4 IT4 OT5 OT6

A1 ,063*

A2 ,081** ,110*** ,094** ,075**

A3 ,099**

A4 ,101**

A5 ,197**

*

,171*** ,135*** ,107*** ,102***

A6 ,139**

*

,162*** ,108**

A7 ,071* ,061*

A8 ,107**

*

,117*** ,159*** ,136*** ,079** ,087**

A9 ,139**

*

,126*** ,071** ,111***

A10 ,152*** ,141*** ,073**

A11 ,145**

*

,075** ,153*** ,122*** ,150*** ,075* ,166*** ,164*** ,120*** ,119***

A12 ,080** ,095** ,070** ,073** ,127*** ,115***

A13

A14 ,429**

*

,400*** ,373*** ,335*** ,616*** ,497*** ,362*** ,337***

Note: Spearman correlation 1-tailed, *Significant at .10; **Significant at .05; ***Significant

at .01